Jump to content
Alex

11/5/2016 - Treasure Anti-Trust Act

Recommended Posts

I have no problem with the change in the mechanic. I've always believed the Treasures were useless in as much as their goal was fostering war.

 

The problem I see however is the timing as everyone has mentioned. It is unfair to decide to do this 3 days after respawn and give only a 10 day warning. It is negatively punishing those who played the game best.

 

The bigger problem though is how the change was made. You mention you spoke with players you trust before making your decision. Did you speak with any of the players who had fairly exploited the game mechanics to their benefits? Doing this will have produced a result which was more fairly balanced for everyone involved. All I can really take from this is that your decision making process is extremely poor (at best), or you are actively trying to punish a certain group of players (at worse). Both are bad for someone who is suppose to be neutral and focused on improving the game. Just my 2 cents.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was no political motivations, other than to help topple (or at least reduce the support for) the current alliance power structure.

 

Thank you for your unbiased game development. It's top notch.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Another terrible update," "Where are the perks though?"

Edited by greatkitteh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do I play this game again. You have this tendency to fix things that need fixing but your timing is about as awful as a poop sammich.  

Edited by BeachBunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe in future, views should be taken from both sides to give a more comprehensive and balaned view. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope people aren't still donating money to this game.

 

But this is what happens when you couple the design and development into the same person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you should make it 30 days, instead of 10, since people aren't super slow and negotiations have already completed over the sale of many treasures which are now effectively worthless. 

 

If you fully anticipate a backlash to virtually every change, there are two major factors you can attack: (1) the notion that your whole active playerbase is rigidly change-averse, or (2) that there is something wrong with the way you roll out changes. 

 

 

I'd be ok with this.  The next treasure respawn should have this change apply.

 

 

Also, Sheepy, you mentioned earlier in this thread that you didn't make rules to be exploited, but then you have this issue:

 

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/17280-game-policy-violation-war-slots-soultaker-npo/#entry289609

 

Which you flat out admitted that we, as players, could exploit the war slot "rule" - and seeing as how we've very innovative with getting around "rules", this will definitely be done in some manner.

 

There definitely needs to be some consistency here between the fixing/rule calling.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was no political motivations, other than to help topple (or at least reduce the support for) the current alliance power structure.

So I guess the next update, you'll be putting a cap of 100 nations on all alliances? I mean you wouldn't want alliances to get to powerful, right?

 

Or maybe you'll introduce a cap on nation income. After all, obviously (going by this change) some nations earn too much, making them (and their alliance) too powerful.

 

That was when I checked out who actually held the treasures and was shocked to see how aggregated they have become in so few alliances.

Obviously you were not paying any attention at all to Treasure Island and the implications behind it, over the past few weeks. It was immediately apparent to myself (and probably a fair few other players), that they would end up gathering alot of treasures.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have thought for a long time that treasures should not offer only economic bonuses, could perhaps split treasures up into a few categories where one category offers the standard gross income boost, another category offers gross production boosts and others could lower disease, pollution or even offer some military bonuses.

 

Keep the same amount of treasures but just split them up into categories so the competition for a specific category of treasure increases and potentially creates the conflicts we were meant to see originally with them. Perhaps even offer an additional bonus on top of the individual treasure bonuses if an alliance could collect a whole set of one particular category of treasures.

 

Throw some chaos in the mix and let the fun occur on its own essentially.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, you should just remove treasures, deposit 200m per treasure into the bank of alliances that have them. and then never touch them again.

 

Treasures are a poor substitute for Color Stocks and even they had their own problems.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex, do you actually read the comments here and think about what has been said? Or do you just not care?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are introducing this change after the players have spent stupendous amount of money to acquire treasures. You have effectively screwed over many people from many alliances because they TRUSTED you to keep the mechanics as is in the short run.

 

I see no reason at all why you cannot delay this update up until the next treasure respawn round, unless you are really intent on destroying all the trust you have with your player base.

 

Top kek.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, this game sucks.  I'm only playing it because I like the MENSA people and somehow, Pfeiffer got a critical mass of them over here (probably him seeking another spot of power and wanting to lead something new).  We should stop expecting Sheepy to exhibit above-average decision making skills.  It will save everyone a lot of heartache.

 

this tbh famalams. The only thing that stopped me/is stopping me from deleting is that it would achieve sheepy's goal of !@#$ing with the hegemoney, albeit in a roundabout way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"but where are perks tho."

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Guy is sounding too much like Bernie Sanders on corporations. All I'm hearing is that we are evil and horrible people just because we have achieved success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I guess the next update, you'll be putting a cap of 100 nations on all alliances? I mean you wouldn't want alliances to get to powerful, right?Or maybe you'll introduce a cap on nation income. After all, obviously (going by this change) some nations earn too much, making them (and their alliance) too powerful.Obviously you were not paying any attention at all to Treasure Island and the implications behind it, over the past few weeks. It was immediately apparent to myself (and probably a fair few other players), that they would end up gathering alot of treasures.

Its socialism on a global (virtual) level in the game. Knock down the rich and give it all to the poor... then causing the whole system to fall... and the poor didn't get their benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Treasure Island is the natural result of the treasures system.

 

Now the incentive has not actually changed but rather the incentive is now to spread them out evenly through your sphere.  The only real change here is procurement services such as Arrgh won't be able to charge so much, but we made bank already so that's fine.

Edited by Ogaden
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone expected Alex to do something about this, but I think he should give TI more than 10 days. I don't know how much they paid for the latest round of treasures they just purchased, but today they're worth a tiny fraction of what they were yesterday. Changes like that that could put billions of dollars down the drain seem a little unfair to suddenly spring on the game.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 57 days or whenever the next treasure respawn is, you should delete all the treasures and the entire treasure system. It's not doing what it was designed to do anyway.

 

Then people can FINALLY just pick colors that they like instead of tying their alliance color to some arbitrary and stupid game mechanic.

 

#StopTheColorOppression 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an opinion too, and it's even more insightful than any of the other comments above. So there. I hope you're happy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.